Wow. Nice of them to finally show up.
The news report I listened to stressed the fact that the decision was based on the CONSTITUTION, that the CONSTITUTION places habeas corpus beyond the reach of the President or Congress. This is a done deal.
Until Dick declares martial law, that is.
Close rulings like this make it all important that Sen. McSame does not get the White House.
Check out Scalia's dissent for an exercise in wing-nuttery jurisprudence. Short version?
SCARY BROWN AY-RABS ARE GOING TO KILL US ALLLLLLLL!!!!
And who said Francisco Franco was still dead? Seems to me he's been sitting on the US SUpreme Court for about 20 years.
Also, please send a thank-you to Ted Kennedy for this decision. The decision's author, Anthony Kennedy, was the replacement for Robert Bork, who was rejected by the US Senate. That fight was led by Teddy Kennedy.
::grins:: It was good of the Supreme Court to give the Administration the Great Green Weenie in this matter. Habeas corpus was hard-wired into the Constitution for a reason, and the Court reaffirmed that reason despite the frenzied screeching of John Roberts and Antonin Scalia.
But what incensed me was Bush saying that he didn't agree with it, but would "abide by it."
Like he's got a fucking choice in the matter. Unless Bush pulls a Musharraf and sends the majority to jail there is not a godsdamned thing he can do except go to the Congress and try again.
Except the Congress most likely won't listen to him as it did in 2005 and 2006. Different Party's in power there, Georgie Boy. So fuck you.
Lindsey Graham, looking more and more like an outraged pixie, has hinted he'll try to amend the Constitution to write habeas out of the rule of law. Have fun trying, you douchebag.
Last night on Dan Abrahms, some blowhole was dancing gleefully about what a wonderful opportunity this was for the GOP because the Amurican public doesn't WANT us treating the prisoners at Gitmo, well, like humans. Abrahms laughed at him, openly mocked him, and then blew right past him like he was the inconsequential turd he is.
Slightly OT, when is Pat Buchanan going to actually expire, right on camera? He is NOT young and ranting like that cannot be very good for him. He has become, for me, like watching John Madden in his coaching days, purple-faced, bellowing on the sidelines. I was always afraid he would suddenly clutch his chest and drop in a heap. Pat is like that. Only he's an assh*le.
Maybe next time we can elect a President who is a Constitutional scholar and who knows better the mean of "protect and defend." Anyone like that available? 
lok at how close the fuckign vote was...this should have been a no brainer...we are on knifes edge right now...next rpesident is goign to have a dramatic effect on the court...
Close whatever... the Supreme Court and the founders idea of Balance of Powers worked. With every Bush outrage I have again and again been amazed at what Franklin the sexist pig and Jefferson the slave owner/abuser did.
(I'm just a little sensitive to "Feminist" Democrats attacking Al Franken over writing for Playboy 8 years ago as a reason he should not be nominated.)
next rpesident is goign to have a dramatic effect on the court...
It would be nice if the next Congress took up it's Constitutional duties to examine the conduct of some Justices who feel that the Constitution can be trumped by security concerns.
Amuseinc personaly i am ready to toss aside a lot of the the "feminists" taht came crawlign otu of the wood work recently..."left wing"authoritaranism is jsut as bad regardless of what the supposed motivation is behind it
Speaking of the Supreme Court,
here's an "interview" on WhiteHouse.Org, with Clarence Thomas. :o)
http://www.whitehouse.org/ask/ct...ask/
cthomas.asp
AND, here's a joint hot-tub "statement" by Cheyney and Scalia, a while back. :o)
http://www.whitehouse.org/news/2...2004/
012304.asp
Question for John McCain:
"If you're elected president, and subsequently, a majority of the Iraqi parliament votes to demand the removal of American troops from Iraq, will you agree to that?"
the most likely outcome of this decision will be that bush/cheney and their inquisitors will continue to dodge, lie, hide and keep the locations of the nearly 26,000 prisoners held without charges by the united states in the dark shadows.
they will probably ram through some of the tribunals who are depraved enough to accept hearsay testimony given under torture in a death penalty case.
that hurt to write just now.
i do not know if there is a way back from sinking this far. i really don't.
someday we may all have to decide if we are citizens, or subjects.
i found myself reading the letters of jean-paul marat a few days ago and thinking to myself "dude was on to some stuff."
Still not ready to write up a post -- and this subject would have been #1, and we will come back to it -- but quickly, let's just note that Justice Kennedy's majority is BEAUTIFUL.
It reads as an ode to the Constitution.
More to follow once I'm back up and around.
The more to follow has this idea which my Mother -- a highly respected retired attorney, now a City Magistrate (that's a judge, in her case, part-time) for the City of Tucson -- and I were kicking around last night about the Opinion and Justice Kennedy:
He has stepped up. After Justice Sandra Day O'Connor left, Justice Kennedy stepped up.
Took him a year or so, but it's HIS Court now. EVERY major decision ('cept maybe one, at most two) in the last two years... well, I'm giving it away. I'll save it for when I have more energy.
Just know, what he was willing to do when he knew Justice O'Connor held the middle, now he won't. He holds the middle now, and he is writing to hold the United States of America together as a country, and he damn well knows it.
He has stepped in to history.
This is Justice Kennedy's Court.
"I do not know if there is a way back from sinking this far."
Good shot, Hussein Boy.
That is one trenchant reality-sentence.
Meanwhile george bush yells at cloud: "I disagree with you floating in the sky, but I'll abide by it."
Did someone mention "change you can believe in" perchance? Because this is it, in the flesh.
As I said on another blog: screw the minority's paranoid whining - Americans can be proud of their country when it does something like this ... & in this day & age, I'll take any threat of a sudden outbreak of modern civilization there that I can. The majority rules. They deserve your thanks, along with encouragement to keep it up for as long as it takes to turn back the tide of pure fugly that's been rolling for so many years now.
"Majority rules" is the mantra of the Bushies. The answer, of course, is "Minority rights." Be careful how you toss those phrases about.
Bear in mind, also, there has been through history a fluctuating number of justices and that could change again with action by Congress.
Who has the power? The REAL power, not the imagined psychological power: Control over jobs, healthcare, physical safety, educational access, freedom from unjust imprisonment... We are all raised as children without access to complete human rights, but maturity means figuring out what power is available to us as adults, what power is not, and working to change the systems that keep entire groups of people from economic parity and, yes, respect. In this country, target for oppression includes non-whites and non-males. EQUALLY, though in different ways. And having access to money does create some advantage, but you remain a target.
The attempt to keep us (Democrats) engaged in the black vs. woman wars continues by the Right in their assault on Michelle Obama and her daughters. Tell me, is being called a conniving unwed black mother more racist or sexist? How about the labeling of the little girls as nappy-headed hos? It's a two-fer -- it's unconscionable on both counts, and if we fall for continued feminist-bashing, we play right into their hands.
2 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
